Full text of officiating guidelines for upcoming season

[pap49cba]

LINK

 

[VAMike23]

Great info there, Pap - thanks for the link.

I see Section 1 appears to contain some somewhat contradictory language:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A defender is permitted one ‘measure-up touch’ and the second touch of any kind BY THE DEFENDER is a foul." [this is new language]

"Not all contact is a foul." [always a basic tenet of officiating]

 

[VAMike23]

Here is a pic to show where the lower defensive box is located in the NBA (below the FT line). It appears that the NCAA is thinking of the same box.

 

[DavidinNaples]

"The current rules must be enforced to allow the freedom of movement so important to our game and that officials be consistent in administering these rules."

Touching the ball handler

• A defender is permitted one ‘measure-up touch’ and the second touch of any kind BY THE DEFENDER is a foul.
• Defenders must not be permitted multiple touches or constant contact of any kind on the ball handler.

Freedom of Movement

• The ball handler, dribbler, cutter, rebounder or shooter must be able to move without being illegally impeded, re-routed or displaced.
• A player’s rhythm, speed, balance and quickness (RSBQ) must not be affected by illegal contact.

We can debate whether the new rules will be enforced vigorously or not....time will tell. But, one fact is clear, the best way to slow UConn down just got ruled illegal.... No more mugging of Stewie or putting headlocks on Stef... Can't grab KML as she cuts or put hands all over MoJeff dribbling...

This is good news for a motion offense w/ great shooters and good ball handlers...

 

[Phil]

That graphic isn't correct. I'll see if I can find a better one.

 

[Phil]

Note that the top of the box is marked by the lines for the outside defenders during a free throw. The other image has the line in a different location.

Also, the width corresponds to marks on the floor, not shown in the other graphic.

 

[doggydaddy]

"The current rules must be enforced to allow the freedom of movement so important to our game and that officials be consistent in administering these rules."

This is good news for a motion offense w/ great shooters and good ball handlers...

You got that right David. The teams with the most skilled players and the best offensive system will be tough to stop.

Any teams out there like that?

 

[VAMike23]

Here's another - each seems to fit the definition:

"...the space from the lower tip of the free-throw circle to the baseline, and between the hash marks located 3′ outside the free throw lane"

 

[Phil]

It is described in words at
Playing rules panel grants Division II, III a delay until 2014-15 on court markings

although a graphic would be nice

 

[VAMike23]

Note that the top of the box is marked by the lines for the outside defenders during a free throw. The other image has the line in a different location.

Also, the width corresponds to marks on the floor, not shown in the other graphic.

You had already posted while I was looking , and found the same graphic

The language on the page I found refers to the FT circle as the upper boundary. Also, considering the purposes of the illustrative graphics shown, I do not see any real difference between the width of the LDB in the first and second graphics, other than the hash marks are not shown explicitly in the first one. The proportion looks right. My 2 cents.

 

[Phil]

Here is a pic to show where the lower defensive box is located in the NBA (below the FT line). It appears that the NCAA is thinking of the same box.

I left a note on the other image, noting the problem (assuming that the NBA doesn't have a different definition, which seems unlikely. )

 

[JRRRJ]

LINK

Seems to me the rule emphasis with the largest potential impact is the one banning continuous leaning. A number of centers & PFs are going to have their usefulness rating downgraded significantly.

The ownership of a spot on the floor is probably second. You can't push someone out of the place they own, whether by hooking, or pushing your butt into them or running into them (except for the screening exception), or extend your arms into the space over their head or your feet into the space under them. Major change.

And I majorly applaud the protection of the shooter while in the air. Do the refs have the option to call a flagrant on an undercut?

On edit: changed "rule" to "rule emphasis", as they are not new rules but items of emphasis for the refs

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Seems to me the rule with the largest potential impact is the one banning continuous leaning. A number of centers & PFs are going to have their usefulness rating downgraded significantly.

The ownership of a spot on the floor is probably second. You can't push someone out of the place they own, whether by hooking, or pushing your butt into them or running into them (except for the screening exception), or extend your arms into the space over their head or your feet into the space under them. Major change.

And I majorly applaud the protection of the shooter while in the air. Do the refs have the option to call a flagrant on an undercut?

No rule changes involved, as it relates to your points. Basically, an insistence by the powers that be that the existing rules be enforced. The box related to the restricted circle is new, however.

In other words, the rules existed, but were rarely called. Absolutely never could extend your arms over them (principle of verticality), but of course that can look different from different spots on the court.

The one-touch rule was instituted with much fanfare a few years back, and I think we all know how long it was enforced. Except every once in a while when an official would randomly call a hand check. It seemed random, as I have seen continuous arm-bars, multiple touches, etc. extensively over the last couple of years. Unlike some, I never have thought officials are all that bad on the clutches and grabs that they see, however, if you are letting touch contact go, you might not see the clutch and grab, thinking it is only a touch you are not going to call. If you can't touch, then obviously you can't grab, either.

 

[Zorro]

Gonna hear a lot of whistles for the first few games!

 

[ThisJustIn]

As always, the hardest thing for the officials to manage is consistency: of training, interpretation, supervision and implementation. How much kvetching will coaches, players and fans indulge in? Will they adapt or will the whistles give up the fight? Much will be in the hands of the Supervisor of Officials -- don't know that they have the funds they need, but we shall see.

It will be very interesting to see tape from the first games v. tape from the last games -- at the top level.

It's not an exact parallel because there are actual rule CHANGES, but the NFL has been a lesson in trying to change behavior for safety. Still issues, clearly, but it all goes back to practice and training new habits.

 

[Phil]

You had already posted while I was looking , and found the same graphic

The language on the page I found refers to the FT circle as the upper boundary. Also, considering the purposes of the illustrative graphics shown, I do not see any real difference between the width of the LDB in the first and second graphics, other than the hash marks are not shown explicitly in the first one. The proportion looks right. My 2 cents.

It isn't the width, but the length. Perhaps the length is correct, if it is intended to be tangent to the imaginary circle, but if so, then the hah marks on the first graphic identifying where the players stand for free throws is wrong.

The imaginary circle isn't painted on courts, so if one is looking at the court, and wants to see whether someone is int he box, they can't be expect to imagine a circle and a line tangent. They can see the hash marks on the side, which define the box. Again, the first graphic is wrong, even if the box size is correct.